NAMA: A Tool of Development or De-industrialization?
The author argues that although the collapse of the Doha “Development” Round in early summer of 2006 was triggered by the refusal of the United States to agree to the reduction of the ceiling on the amount of domestic subsidies paid to the US farmers, there were some fundamental reasons behind the failure of the talk related to the contradictions in design and implementation of WTO rules to detrimental interests of developing countries. He uses the example of NAMA to highlight the inconsistencies between the objectives and spirit of the agreed Doha Text and the subsequent proposals made by developed countries during the process of negotiations. He shows that these inconsistencies are, in fact, a reflection of the inherent double standards in GATT/WTO rules. On the basis of experience of successful industrializers and the failure of recent across-the-board and universal trade liberalization prescribed by neoliberals, he proposes the necessary changes in WTO rules in order to make them conducive to industrialization and development.
|Date of creation:||Dec 2006|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:6649. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ekkehart Schlicht)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.